kingcast955@icloud.com -- In the Civil Rights Justice system there are two sets of people: Those who are haters and those who fight back. These are their stories. Blink-Blink.
Movies: KingCast.net and KingCast65 YouTube -- A NENPA member news and information journal.

28 February 2013

KingCast clarifies First Amendment Rights with NY Family Court Referee Jennifer Mitek and the Courts continue to violate Sandy Chadee's parental custody and visitation rights for no lawful reason.

NY Unified Court system loves them some KingCast!

My email to Ms. Ruslander is in the comments section.

Wonder who this is.... I'll bet it is someone involved with ACS/government. They live up in this journal and wish it would go away because I expose their dirt as no one else does.

PS up front: At a recent hearing, the Court ORDERED ACS to conduct a goddamn investigation into some of Ms. Chadee's allegations relative to her Motion to Return Custody that was filed at least a year ago. ACS failed to do anything and now Rita Kaufman says the case is closed. She is Devil incarnate and she knows it. I looked her straight in the eye yesterday and she knows that I know it too.New movie coming soon. Yesterday I walked right into Referee Mitek's office in that nasty little double-wide that Long Island calls a Family Court, and sat myself on down. Recall, this is part of the same general issue where lesbian activist Judge Debra Silber and supposed Child Law Guardian Rita Kaufman stole a child from a fit mother, over the direct recommendation of court-appointed forensic psychologist Dr. Kaplan. When Referee Mitek asked whether or not I was a party to the case at which point the following colloquy ensued:

"Well I don't know.... I do know that Carlos Pena filed a bogus criminal complaint on me and Ms. Chadee, and I know that this Court issued some kind of Order through Ms. Chadee that I was supposed to take down information on my journal page about this case....."

"You're not a party, please leave the room."

"Well okay that's fine, so I'm just here to make sure that my First Amendment Rights are as I imagined them, fully intact.... because you may recall Attorney Mitek I wrote you about this but never heard back."

Here is the background on that matter; stay tuned for how Mitek and many others are giving Sandy Chadee the high hard one with regard to taking away visitation rights to her child for no goddamn reason whatsoever. Well I've listened to a tape recording of the child talking to his mother, and I have heard the child talking to his mother and I have no doubt that the child wants to live with his mother instead of the former deadbeat dad who had to be ORDERED to pay child support and who is a bit of a jailbird.Referee Mitek and Rita Kaufman were all pissed off, and I could distinctly hear Ms. Chadee ask "Is there a law against taping my own child" when they tried to claim that Ms. Chadee had sent the child into a meeting with Rita Kaufman with a surreptitious taping device. Nope, sorry ladies that is not what happened.

But in spite of the clear cut code provision that requires the Law Guardian to effectuate the desires of the child unless grave harm may come to him, Rita Kaufman continues to force the child to live with the father. She has tried to order up a psychological exam to make her look bad, but Dr. Kaplan already did that and said the child should go to the mother!Attorney Kaufman told the child that he was going to have to live with his father "because your mother didn't file enough papers with the court." So Ms. Chadee has prepared a list of violations by Law Guardian Rita Kaufman, and I have read the code and see her violations clear as day and they will be set forth on this journal page and in a short film soon. Her Court appointed attorney would not file it, no surprises there because none of them are willing to rock the boat. It's sad but true. But she's going to file it and will probably sue under Article 78 for this series of ongoing events. Attorney Kaufman will no doubt try to point out that the Federal Lawsuit against Judge Silber and her was dismissed but in that Order there was absolutely no mention of Rita Kaufman, plus that lawsuit concerned other activity anyway.

So to Referee Mitek, Rita Kaufman, Carlos Pena and his happy-assed giggling attorney: Go ahead on guys with your happy-assed charade because guess what? That child is very precocious and he already said some very unsavory things about Rita Kaufman; I heard it with my own two ears although I won't publicly repeat them. The fact that Ms. Kaufman discussed legal theory of the case with a five year-old however, I can and will publish. And when that child reaches legal maturity he is going to sue the snot out of all of you -- using some of the information presented right here on this journal page no less -- for depriving him of his basic constitutional rights, and I will be right there with him, catching it all on KingCast video. And you better believe the cameras they will have in twelve years are going to capture it all with alarming alacrity. Twelve years passes by quickly; I will be 59 years old then and still not taking any shit from anybody regarding my First Amendment Rights.

5 comments:

Hate is a strong word best used sparingly. I do not hate any individual person in this case, but I sure as hell do hate what they are doing, or failing to do, in the case of most of Ms. Chadee's attorneys.

What is happening to her and to her child and by extension to others around her should be found to be criminal conduct and all of these clowns thrown behind bars for this brand of bullshit.

And you better believe this comment stays up on this journal page, along with whatever else I goddamn feel like saying about it.

I have to commend you for traveling all the way here to New York to cover this when it would have just another case of abuse in the system people have to have more integrity like you. You bring a breath of fresh air in life. Making people aware on subjects like this sheds light on what happens in real life

As to Attorney Mitek, this is what I wrote her two months ago, before I appeared before her last week with my concerns. I am certain you will find my legal analysis extremely cogent and on point. I am now going to put this case before an International audience because these New York Courts have basically stolen a child from a fit mother and given it to an irresponsible father jailbird father who failed to pay child support (among other things) and for that, there is simply no excuse. And if you sit by and allow it to continue you are part of the problem and not the solution.

Christopher King 12/26/12

to jmitek, sandy, bcc: BojanDear Attorney Mitek:

I have reviewed what appears to be a Court ORDER directed at me by way of a third party who has absolutely no editorial control over what I chose to publish. As the ORDER appears to be in violation of my First Amendment Rights, principles and duties incumbent of the Fourth Estate I am going to respectfully decline to follow any such ORDER unless or until a Court of competent jurisdiction holds an evidentiary hearing that addresses the threshold requirements involved in any Prior Restraint sort of case, i.e. compelling governmental interest, narrowly tailored, least restrictive means, etc.

See my related journal entry and upcoming movie (later this evening) on this matter. Should you wish to actively pursue this issue, please email me here to arrange for a mutually satisfactory time to schedule a hearing on the merits as I am on the West Coast throughout the Holiday Season. We can determine what address should be used for any Subpoenas at that time and we will then go forward with an eye toward protection of any and all Constitutional interests as the Law requires.

I will say this: I have never lost a First Amendment defense issue personally or an behalf of any criminal client in years gone by. Further, I am 75/25 W/L on offense. The name of the journal is the name of the game.

I am actually located in Rhode Island and just covering this case as an investigative reporter.

Ms. Chadee will forward her concerns to your agency for follow up. At some point someone has to be accountable here.

Best regards,

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:39 AM, wrote:Mr. King,I regret that we are unable to respond fully to this message. Unfortunately e-mail provides no way for us to determine the origin or authenticity of the message. A more detailed response could disrupt on-going litigation and compromise the interests of those involved.

If a case is currently pending before a court, matters related to the representation of a child should be directed to the judge. If no case is currently pending, any concerns about the representation of a child must be made in writing and signed by the author. Before taking any such action, you are strongly urged to discuss the matter with your attorney.

Finally, it appears that you are located in the Second Judicial Department and you should direct your concerns there.

>>> Christopher King 3/4/2013 6:34 AM >>>

When I was a State attorney I believed in the government. The things I am seeing today make my blanche.http://www.courts.state.ny.us/ad3/OAC/index.html

Followers

About Me

I shoot Courtroom video like no one else in the Country. I'm an inquisitive guy with a camera, a law degree, AAG experience, journalism experience, trial experience, managerial mortgage, title insurance and property experience and an open mind.